LEESBURG, Va. — House Democrats privately and publicly steamed Thursday evening about Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer’s decision to back passage of a GOP spending patch they had fiercely opposed.

Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) said he was “extremely disappointed,” while Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.) called it a “gut punch.” Some Democrats attending the yearly Democratic policy retreat here went so far as to privately hope that Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) would launch a primary challenge against Schumer — though he’s not up for re-election until 2028. Some centrist lawmakers even quipped about cutting checks to Ocasio-Cortez’s campaign.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries told his caucus behind closed doors that they could be proud of their decision to vote against the stopgap funding bill. He did not mention Schumer.

“Dr. King once made the observation that, although everyone may not see it at the moment, the time is always right to do what’s right,” he said, according to a person in the room. “This week, House Democrats did what was right. We stood up against Donald Trump. We stood up against Elon Musk. We stood up against the extreme MAGA Republicans.”

Jeffries received a standing ovation from his caucus. He and other Democratic leaders later said in a joint statement that “House Democrats will not be complicit” and “remain strongly opposed to the partisan spending bill under consideration in the Senate.”

It was part of a split-screen reality for House and Senate Democrats over the past 48 hours, since House Republicans managed to muscle through their seven-month stopgap.

Over the first two days of their retreat in Virginia, House Democrats urged the Senate to follow their lead and stop the bill. All but one House Democrat had opposed the bill. Meanwhile, Democratic senators were wrangling with a tougher choice — unlike in the House, some in their ranks would have to put up votes for any shutdown-averting bill, greatly raising the stakes.

Still, lawmakers expressed little sympathy. “Democrats were elected to fight for working people, not put up a fake fight,” said Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas), chair of the Progressive Caucus.

Separately on Thursday evening, Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro and Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer addressed House Democrats gathered at the Lansdowne Resort for a closed-door discussion with Jeffries, drawing a warm reception from the lawmakers.

The three governors all represent states won by President Donald Trump in 2024 and have tacked to the center at home.

The lawmakers also heard from presidential pundits including James Carville, Bill Clinton’s strategy maven, and Dan Pfeiffer, Barack Obama’s communications director, among other experts who are advising the minority party.

“We’ve got to show the American people that we’re focused on their worries when they wake up in the morning and go to bed at night,” Beshear told reporters earlier Thursday. Democrats had to focus on “core concerns” to earn back voters’ trust, he said.

He also criticized California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s decision to put former Trump strategist Steve Bannon on his podcast, telling reporters: “Steve Bannon espouses hatred and anger and even, at some points, violence, and I don’t think we should give him oxygen on any platform, ever, anywhere.”

The Democratic base wants a fight. Chuck Schumer won’t give it to them.

The Senate minority leader on Thursday backed away from the shutdown confrontation that many liberal voters and activist leaders had been pushing for — arguing that closing the government would only empower President Donald Trump and billionaire ally Elon Musk in their bureaucracy-slashing campaign.

That decision sent shockwaves through the left and had many in their ranks seething at a top party leader who had sought to win them over in recent years.

Ezra Levin, the co-executive director of the liberal grassroots organization Indivisible, quickly dubbed it the “Schumer surrender.”

“I guess we’ll find out to what extent Schumer is leading the party into irrelevance,” he said in an interview, adding that his decision “tells me maybe he’s lost a step.”

The news that the top Senate Democrat would be backing down dejected scores of House members who were gathered at a resort about 25 miles outside of Washington for the Democratic Caucus’ annual policy retreat.

They had stuck together behind House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, who had wrangled all but one of his members to oppose Republicans’ seven-month funding patch earlier in the week.

“Extremely disappointed,” Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) said after he heard the news. “It gives them the ability, Elon Musk the ability, to go through and continue to do the shit he’s doing.”

And further outside Washington, longtime party activists and high-dollar donors fumed about Schumer: “He sucks,” one state party chair who was granted anonymity to respond candidly, adding that the cave constituted “political malpractice.”

In anticipation of the criticism he was certain to receive, Schumer delivered a 10-minute speech on the Senate floor defending his decision, later holding a question-and-answer session with Capitol Hill reporters and publishing a New York Times op-ed.

His points were two-fold: First, a shutdown would play into Trump and Musk’s hands, he argued, allowing them to continue with their slash-and-burn campaign overdrive. His second argument was more political — and in keeping with his long history as a leading strategist counseling his party to pay heed to the concerns of America’s middle class above all else.

“For Donald Trump, a shutdown would be a gift,” Schumer said. “It would be the best distraction he could ask for from his awful agenda.

“Right now, Donald Trump owns the chaos in the government. He owns the chaos in the stock market,” he added. “In a shutdown, we would be busy fighting with Republicans over which agencies to reopen, which to keep closed, instead of debating the damage Donald Trump’s agenda is causing the American people.”

Some Democrats offered some sympathy, given the dilemma he and other senators faced. The GOP-written stopgap cuts some $12 billion in domestic funding while adding money for migrant deportations and some other programs Democrats oppose. It also contains no language that would stop the Trump administration from continuing to hold back congressionally approved spending.

But Schumer argued there was no telling what Trump and Musk would do in a shutdown, where the White House would “have full authority to deem whole agencies, programs and personnel non-essential, furloughing staff with no promise they would ever be rehired,” he said.

“I don’t think he had a choice,” Democratic National Committee member Joseph Paulino Jr. said, adding that Democrats “don’t have any cohesive plan. They don’t have a strategy. They don’t have any clear direction where they want their … opposition to go.”

Lisa Gilbert, co-president of Public Citizen, called it a “challenging” choice for Schumer even as she called a temporary shutdown “a better option than passing a bad bill.” She predicted blowback from grassroots activists but demurred on how lasting it might be.

“There will be strong reactions,” she said. “But the exact consequences, I think it’s too soon to know.”

Prior to Schumer’s remarks, progressive groups were encouraged by the succession of Senate Democrats who had publicly announced opposition to the GOP funding measure. More than a dozen did so Thursday, many of them echoing the language used by activists.

“I don’t want a shutdown but I can’t vote for this overreach of power, giving Trump and Musk unchecked power to line their pockets,” said Sen. Andy Kim of New Jersey in an online post.

Joel Payne, the chief communications director at MoveOn, called the moment “pretty disappointing,” adding that it crystallized for many in Democratic activists that Schumer and other Democratic leaders may not be equipped for fighting a more brazen, second-term Trump.

“I think it does say a little something about whether or not these folks truly understand the fight that we’re in right now,” Payne said. “And I think that’s a question that a lot of folks are asking.”

The irony is that Schumer had spent much of the past five years patching up his relationship with the Democratic Party’s left flank. Once known as a friend of Wall Street interests and an ally of moderates, he faced similar criticism as minority leader during the first Trump term, then retooled his reputation after becoming Senate majority leader in 2021 — embracing the expansive pandemic-era spending plans of President Joe Biden and winning converts among liberals.

Now Schumer is facing sharp backlash from some of Biden’s top advisers. His former top domestic policy adviser, Susan Rice, told Schumer to “please grow a spine. And quickly.” Neera Tanden, who held the same top policy job, expressed exasperation after Schumer told reporters Trump would be more unpopular — and Democrats would be better positioned to fight — in the fall.

“HE’S UNPOPULAR NOW,” she responded on X. “LORD!”

Schumer did not take any incoming fire from his fellow Democratic leader and Brooklyn native, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries. Speaking to his members at the retreat, Jeffries told them that their votes were “something they can be proud of now and tomorrow and years from now” but did not criticize Schumer directly, according to three people granted anonymity to describe the private remarks.

“We stood up against Donald Trump. We stood up against Elon Musk. We stood up against the extreme MAGA Republicans,” Jeffries said in a statement. “We can defend that vote because we stood on the side of the American people.”

A leader of the Democratic left in the House was not as oblique. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York — often mentioned as a potential primary rival for Schumer — said on BLN Thursday that Schumer had made a “tremendous mistake.”

“To me, it is almost unthinkable why Senate Democrats would vote to hand [one of] the few pieces of leverage that we have away for free,” she said.

Asked Thursday to respond in advance to possible calls for new Democratic leadership in the Senate, Schumer said he made a “tough choice … based on what I thought were the merits.” (None of his Senate colleagues, notably, joined in the firestorm of criticism.)

“You have to make these decisions based on what is best for not only your party but your country, and I firmly believe and always have that I’ve made the right decision,” he continued. “I believe that my members understand that … conclusion and respect it.”

Mia McCarthy and Nicholas Wu contributed to this report.

Senate Democrats appear poised to vote for a spending bill they hate to avoid a worse fate: Allowing a government shutdown that could enable President Donald Trump and Elon Musk to make deeper cuts to federal agencies.

The announcement late Thursday by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer that he would support the House GOP’s seven-month stopgap measure was an acknowledgment that Democrats have little choice if they want to avoid empowering Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency initiative to unilaterally halt more federal programs under the cover of a shutdown.

“The Democrats have A or B: Keep the government open or yield the authority to the president,” Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.), a Trump ally who speaks frequently with White House officials, said in an interview.

In a speech on the Senate floor on Thursday night announcing he would support the House-passed stopgap, Schumer said he had little choice as the Friday shutdown deadline loomed.

“Musk has already said he wants a shutdown, and public reporting has shown he is already making plans to expedite his destruction of key government programs and services,” said Schumer. “A shutdown would give Donald Trump the keys to the city, the state and the country.”

The White House would not telegraph its shutdown plans, including whether it would unilaterally halt federal programs and furlough workers. Nor would it detail the work DOGE could undertake if most of the federal government were non-operational.

But on Capitol Hill, Republican lawmakers were saying the quiet part out loud: By opposing the GOP’s funding plan in protest of Trump’s dismantling of government, Democrats would, in fact, be helping his cause.

“We’re cutting employees right now, because we’re trying to save costs,” Mullin continued. “And if the Democrats are going to play a game and shut it down — and then yield the power to him — it’ll be really easy for them to lift up the hood, look at all the essential and non-essential employees. Seems like to me it plays in their favor.”

Punctuating that threat, Musk on Wednesday night responded on X with a thinking-face emoji to a suggestion from another social media user that furloughed workers should not be brought back on the government payroll after a shutdown.

Handing Trump the power to decide what parts of the federal government are essential has been high on the list of risks Senate Democrats have been weighing. They essentially face a lose-lose choice between letting federal funding lapse and advancing a funding bill that cuts non-defense programs by about $13 billion while giving Trump leeway to shift federal money.

Both outcomes are the opposite of what Democrats tried to achieve during weeks of bipartisan funding negotiations, where they fought unsuccessfully for language to block Trump from halting spending Congress already approved and firing tens of thousands of federal workers.

Now Democratic senators worry that Trump and Musk could use a shutdown to fire more government employees, including military veterans, and shutter some agencies indefinitely.

At one point during a closed-door lunch meeting Thursday, Democratic Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York warned her colleagues of “serious harm” if federal funding were to lapse and that “this will not be a normal shutdown” — raising her voice so loud that her comments were audible outside the room.

“We could see more veterans lose their jobs. We could see government departments that never open up again. So that’s a bad option,” said Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) on Thursday.

Kelly has said he plans to oppose the stopgap bill, however, and it remained unclear Thursday night whether enough Democrats would join Schumer to support a procedural vote necessary to move onto final passage of the legislation. With Schumer and Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania committed to voting “yes,” Republicans need six more Democrats to seal the deal — Sen. Rand Paul, a Kentucky Republican, has long said he’ll vote “no.”

Meanwhile, Senate Republicans have argued it would be Democrats who risked further stressing the federal workforce under a shutdown scenario.

Sen. James Lankford of Oklahoma, a member of Republican leadership, said Thursday that a government shutdown would “obviously” be a “clear moment to declare who’s essential and non-essential, and that’s a moment right now in the middle of the DOGE conversations.”

“Federal workers are going through a lot right now. There’s a lot of challenge for them, a lot of stress for them. Democrats are literally adding more to it,” Lankford said in an interview. “Not being pejorative, but one of the things I’ve said to my colleagues: ‘Do you really want to do this right now to federal workers and their families?’”

One former Trump administration official, granted anonymity to share their insights, said that using a shutdown to accomplish the administration’s bureaucracy-slashing goals was a “crazy” strategy but one that could not entirely be ruled out.

The person said the White House could be “very comfortable” during a shutdown, which would give broad latitude to Trump’s Office of Management and Budget, and his budget director, Russ Vought, to make unilateral decisions about spending.

“It’s going to prove their point, if you only have essential employees and things work fine,” the former official said. “You could have a painless shutdown and prove a metaphorical point that we need less government.”

Republicans have been preparing to lay blame for a potential shutdown at Democrats’ feet. Trump himself insisted to reporters Thursday that a shutdown would not be Republicans’ fault, especially after he personally lobbied members of the conservative House Freedom Caucus to vote to keep federal programs afloat.

“People were amazed that the Republicans were able to vote in unison like that, so strongly,” Trump said.

A White House official had declined earlier in the day on Thursday to offer any further specifics on the possibility of a shutdown, how the administration would handle it and what it would mean for DOGE’s ongoing work, beyond the president’s remarks.

But past examples hinted at the authority the administration believes it has during a shutdown. As budget director during Trump’s first term, Vought played a key role steering the administration through a 35-day partial shutdown in 2019 sparked by a fight over border wall funding. During that shutdown, federal agencies used creative approaches to mitigate some of the public backlash.

Some of those strategies were later found to have been illegal: After the Interior Department diverted money from visitor fees to pay for operations at National Parks during the shutdown, the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office issued a legal opinion concluding that the Trump administration move violated federal laws.

OMB also at that time allowed agencies to perform certain duties they would not normally be allowed to execute under a shutdown scenario. The budget office, for instance, allowed the IRS to recall staff to prepare and process tax returns and later permitted the agency to resume paying tax refunds. The Agriculture Department continued to fund Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits and the Fish and Wildlife Service called back furloughed staff to clean up wildlife refuges.

Former Trump White House officials point to that shutdown to demonstrate the broad purview OMB has over spending during a federal funding lapse and how it can work to make the experience as painless or painful as possible — depending on what is most helpful for the administration in power.

One unanswered question is just how aggressive a second-term Trump administration could be during a shutdown in further shrinking the federal bureaucracy. William Hoagland, who spent several decades working on the Senate Budget Committee and advising Republicans on budget matters, said lawmakers were right to fret about what might happen.

“The administration is breaking a lot of china,” he said, “and doing a lot of things that are unprecedented.”

Lisa Kashinsky, Rachael Bade and Katherine Tully-McManus contributed to this report.